Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeOther LawsIOCL Wins in Supreme Court: NGT Orders Quashes, Petrol Pump Project Cleared...

IOCL Wins in Supreme Court: NGT Orders Quashes, Petrol Pump Project Cleared After 6 Year Delay

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Supreme Court of India has set aside orders passed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT), allowing the establishment of a petrol pump that had been stalled for nearly six years due to prolonged litigation. 

The bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K. Vinod Chandran found serious fault with the approach adopted by the NGT. It held that the Tribunal had abdicated its statutory duty by delegating core adjudicatory functions to expert committees instead of deciding the matter itself.

The case arose after a private individual approached the NGT alleging that a proposed petrol pump violated siting guidelines issued by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). The objection was based on proximity to a gas agency, a play school, and nearby residential areas, purportedly breaching the prescribed minimum distance norms.

The NGT, while considering the matter, relied on the “precautionary principle” and initially kept the No Objection Certificates (NOCs) in abeyance. It also constituted a joint committee to examine compliance with environmental norms, effectively deferring its adjudicatory role.

The Court reiterated that while expert committees may assist judicial bodies, final adjudication must rest with the tribunal or court, especially in an adversarial system governed by principles of natural justice.

The Court noted that the NGT’s initial order lacked substantive findings and merely shifted responsibility to a committee. A subsequent execution order was passed without issuing notice to affected parties, violating fundamental principles of natural justice. The Tribunal failed to properly evaluate multiple reports, including those indicating compliance with applicable guidelines.

Examining the reports on record, the Court observed that the proposed site was located in a commercial area as per the applicable Master Plan, and not within a designated residential zone under local laws.

The court found that the presence of isolated residences or nearby structures did not automatically violate CPCB norms. The alleged play school was no longer operational. There was no evidence of breach of the prescribed distance criteria when assessed in light of zoning regulations.

Importantly, the Court held that mere apprehensions of environmental harm without supporting data or analysis cannot justify denial of a lawful commercial activity.

The Supreme Court also raised concerns regarding the locus standi of the original applicant before the NGT. It noted that there was no clear indication that the individual was directly affected by the project, suggesting the possibility of motivated litigation.

The Court described the case as one where a “busy body” had stalled a public utility project, resulting in undue hardship to entrepreneurs and delay in public service delivery.

Setting aside the NGT’s orders dated February 1, 2021, and November 11, 2022, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals filed by Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and others.

Rather than remanding the matter, the Court directed the District Magistrate, Haridwar to reconsider the issue afresh, taking into account current statutory requirements. It further ordered that the petrol pump be permitted if found compliant with applicable laws.

Case Details

Case Title: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Versus Deepak Sharma and Ors.

Citation: JURISHOUR-460-SC-2026

Case No.: Civil Appeal No.3042 of 2023

Date: 23/03/2026

Read More: GST | 2 Demand Notices Can’t Be Created For One Order: Allahabad HC

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Customs Bank Account Freeze Can’t Continue Beyond 12 Months Merely Because Adjudication Is Pending: Madras HC

The Madras High Court has held that the provisional attachment of a bank account...

57th GST Council Meeting Rescheduled To October 8 Due To Unavoidable Circumstances

The 57th meeting of the Goods and Services Tax Council has been rescheduled to...

Additional Excise Duty Credit Can’t Offset Basic Excise Duty Under Old MODVAT Rules: Madras HC

The Madras High Court has held that additional excise duty paid on inputs during...

Reassessment Scrutiny Can’t Begin Before Taxpayer’s Objections Are Decided: Bombay HC Quashes Premature Notices

The Bombay High Court has held that an Assessing Officer cannot issue scrutiny notices...

More like this

Customs Bank Account Freeze Can’t Continue Beyond 12 Months Merely Because Adjudication Is Pending: Madras HC

The Madras High Court has held that the provisional attachment of a bank account...

57th GST Council Meeting Rescheduled To October 8 Due To Unavoidable Circumstances

The 57th meeting of the Goods and Services Tax Council has been rescheduled to...

Additional Excise Duty Credit Can’t Offset Basic Excise Duty Under Old MODVAT Rules: Madras HC

The Madras High Court has held that additional excise duty paid on inputs during...